A new hybrid solution to boost SAT solver performance

Proceedings -Design, Automation and Test in Europe, DATE

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 1307-1312

  Fang, Lei ^a   Hsiao, Michael S ^a  

^a State University

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATION; DIGITAL INTEGRATED CIRCUITS;

INCREMENTAL INTERFACES; SEARCH SOLVERS;

INTEGRATED CIRCUIT MANUFACTURE;

EID: 34548358726     PISSN: 15301591     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/DATE.2007.364478     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (18)

1. H. Bennaceur, I. Gouachi, and G. Plateau. An incremental branch-and-bound method for the satisfiability problem. INFORMS J. on Computing, 10(3):301-308, 1998.
2. S. Cook. The complexity of theorem proving procedures. In Proceedings of the third annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pages 151-158, 1971.
3. M. Davis, G. Logemann, and D. W. Loveland. Machine program for theorem proving. In Communications of the ACM, volume 5, pages 394-397, 1962.
4. N. Eén and N. Sörensson. An extensible sat-solver. In SAT, pages 502-518, 2003.
5. R. W. Fang H. Complete local search for propositional satisfiability. In Proc. of 19th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 161-166, 2004.
6. B. Ferris and J. Froehlich. Walksat as an informed heuristic to dpll in sat solving. "http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/bdferris/papers/WalkSAT- DPLL.pdf".
7. A. S. Fukunaga. Efficient implementations of sat local search. In SAT, 2004.
8. D. Habet, C. M. Li, L. Devendeville, and M. Vasquez. A hybrid approach for sat. In CP '02: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, pages 172-184, London, UK, 2002. Springer-Verlag.
9. P. Manolios and S. K. Srinivasan. A parameterized benchmark suite of hard pipelined-machine-verification problems. In CHARME, pages 363-366, 2005.
10. B. Mazure, L. Sais, and E. Gregoire. Boosting complete techniques thanks to local search methods. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 22(3-4):319-331, 1998.
11. M. W. Moskewicz, C. F. Madigan, Y. Zhao, L. Zhang, and S. Malik. Chaff: Engineering an Efficient SAT Solver. In Proceedings of the 38th Design Automation Conference (DAC'01), 2001.
12. I. Research. http://www.haifa.ibm.com/projects/verification/rb_homepage/ bmcbenchmarks.html.
13. B. Selman, H. A. Kautz, and B. Cohen. Noise strategies for improving local search. In Proceedings of the Twelfth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'94), pages 337-343, Seattle, 1994.
14. B. Selman, H. J. Levesque, and D. Mitchell. A new method for solving hard satisfiability problems. In P. Rosenbloom and P. Szolovits, editors, Proceedings of the Tenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 440-446, Menlo Park, California, 1992. AAAI Press.
15. O. Shtrichman. Pruning techniques for the SAT-based bounded model checking problem. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2144:58-70, 2001.
16. M. Velev. http://www.ece.cmu.edu/~mvelev/sat_benchmarks.html
17. J. Whittemore, J. Kim, and K. A. Sakallah. Satire: A new incremental satisfiability engine. In DAC, pages 542-545, 2001.
18. L. Zhang and S. Malik. Extracting small unsatisfiable cores from unsatisfiable boolean formulas. In SAT, May 2003.